IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

15 Pages V  « < 11 12 13 14 15 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Resampler plugin, uses SoX 14.2.0 resampling routines
jamps
post Dec 20 2012, 15:47
Post #301





Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 19-December 12
From: Finland
Member No.: 105278



QUOTE (Dario @ Dec 19 2012, 23:49) *
QUOTE (jamps @ Dec 19 2012, 23:23) *
Could I set 24-bit or 32-bit somewhere, or is it pointless? smile.gif

File -> Preferences -> Playback -> Output -> Output format

But it is quite pointless.

It is chosen automatically by foobar2000, I can't change it.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dario
post Dec 20 2012, 15:51
Post #302





Group: Members
Posts: 158
Joined: 20-September 11
Member No.: 93842



I don't see why it shouldn't let you modify the output's bit depth.

Make sure you're seeing this: http://i.imgur.com/ujavx.png?1
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jamps
post Dec 20 2012, 18:40
Post #303





Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 19-December 12
From: Finland
Member No.: 105278



Ah-ha, I had to change the setting to use explicitly my soundcard(with Kernel Streaming):
Before:
http://i.imgbox.com/acwAb5r6.png
After:
http://i.imgbox.com/adjXTRh7.png
This option doesn't exist with DS(DirectSound). Can it be added? Because using KS results that I only hear foobar2000,
nothing else makes a sound smile.gif

So, this resampler should give the best audio quality? I am resampling up to 192000Hz.
Oh and btw, I didn't understand what the aliasing does, seems like one picture is missing from the explanation...

This post has been edited by jamps: Dec 20 2012, 18:46
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
xnor
post Dec 20 2012, 21:20
Post #304





Group: Developer
Posts: 569
Joined: 29-April 11
From: Austria
Member No.: 90198



All of this is off-topic, but ...

DS will always use 32-bit on Vista/7/8,
Resampling to 192 kHz will not improve audio quality,
Aliasing.

If you have questions I recommend opening a new thread in the appropriate forum or doing a search.

This post has been edited by xnor: Dec 20 2012, 21:21
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lvqcl
post Dec 20 2012, 21:51
Post #305





Group: Developer
Posts: 3358
Joined: 2-December 07
Member No.: 49183



Pictures from http://src.infinitewave.ca/ , resampling of a sine sweep signal.

without aliasing:



with aliasing:



This post has been edited by lvqcl: Dec 20 2012, 21:52
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dario
post Dec 20 2012, 21:57
Post #306





Group: Members
Posts: 158
Joined: 20-September 11
Member No.: 93842



QUOTE (lvqcl @ Dec 20 2012, 21:51) *
Pictures from http://src.infinitewave.ca/ , resampling of a sine sweep signal.

without aliasing:



with aliasing:


Something doesn't seem right about those images. I thought SoX allowed aliasing to occur only above the passband?

This post has been edited by Dario: Dec 20 2012, 22:00
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lvqcl
post Dec 20 2012, 22:09
Post #307





Group: Developer
Posts: 3358
Joined: 2-December 07
Member No.: 49183



"Aliasing" option actually means aliasing for downsampling ang imaging for upsampling.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bandpass
post Dec 21 2012, 07:53
Post #308





Group: Members
Posts: 326
Joined: 3-August 08
From: UK
Member No.: 56644



True, but the InfiniteWave graphs are all for downsampling, so what we are seeing here is aliasing, and since the (high-level) aliasing is at >20kHz, it is above the passband.

The bottom graph also show some low-level aliasing below the passband (the purple line extending from the high-level aliasing). So a more accurate description of the aliasing option (for downsampling) might be that it allows aliasing, at levels above the selected artefact rejection level, above the passband; below the passband there may also be aliasing (and even without the aliasing option) but only at levels less than or equal to the selected artefact rejection level.

(These graphs are not from SoX BTW, but the same principles apply.)

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Avi
post Jan 1 2013, 21:10
Post #309





Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 30-January 06
Member No.: 27420



I just wanted to add my thanks for your work on this resampler. I use the mod1 version to resample the few tracks I have at 22050 to conform with my DACport LX (16/24 - 44.1/48/88.2/96). It is fantastic!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
xsmid4
post Jan 3 2013, 20:01
Post #310





Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: 13-September 11
Member No.: 93689



Hello,
would you be so kind and add the possibility to select the target samplerate depending on source samplerate? It would be very useful for some USB dacs with 2 masterclocks 22mhz and 24mhz which select the masterclock speed depending on incoming usb stream. For example Casea Orion Lite. Because resampling just to one fixed samplerate cancels the advantage of such 2 masterclock dacs. Many thanks.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lvqcl
post Jan 3 2013, 20:34
Post #311





Group: Developer
Posts: 3358
Joined: 2-December 07
Member No.: 49183



Probably you can do it using _mod and _mod2 versions.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
xnor
post Jan 3 2013, 20:44
Post #312





Group: Developer
Posts: 569
Joined: 29-April 11
From: Austria
Member No.: 90198



QUOTE (xsmid4 @ Jan 3 2013, 20:01) *
Because resampling just to one fixed samplerate cancels the advantage of such 2 masterclock dacs.

May I ask you why you resample then?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
xsmid4
post Jan 4 2013, 04:31
Post #313





Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: 13-September 11
Member No.: 93689



QUOTE (xnor @ Jan 3 2013, 21:44) *
QUOTE (xsmid4 @ Jan 3 2013, 20:01) *
Because resampling just to one fixed samplerate cancels the advantage of such 2 masterclock dacs.

May I ask you why you resample then?


every dac chip resamples internally, but then integrated resampler is not as good as Sox, so pre-resampling the 44khz (and other) material 4x to 176khz will skip 2 levels of internal resampler in dac chip. These first two levels are most important for quality. Addtional benefit is that you can choose your own filter (for example 90% passband, which results in slow roll off filter), because AD1955 chip doesn't have selectable filters and the default one is quite sharp = more artefacts.
For same reason Mark Levinson highend dacs use DSP in front of DAC chip, with custom filters/resamplers
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SoNic67
post Jan 5 2013, 12:31
Post #314





Group: Members
Posts: 108
Joined: 3-February 11
Member No.: 87877



Correct, most of the simple on-chip oversamplers in the DAC integrated circuits are just... OK. The filtering is simplified compared with a PC or DSP version and audio quality is not at maximum possible.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Soundgeezer
post Jan 9 2013, 15:06
Post #315





Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 9-January 13
Member No.: 105735



hey guys, first post here:

i'd like to try sox in foobar and dragged and dropped the dll into the components folder.
but when right clicking on an audio file in the playlist and go to convert i only get "quick convert" and default as an option.

Could somebody help me ? i'd like to convert files from 44.1 24 bit to 96 24 bit and vice versa.

thank you
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lvqcl
post Jan 9 2013, 15:50
Post #316





Group: Developer
Posts: 3358
Joined: 2-December 07
Member No.: 49183



QUOTE
i only get "quick convert" and default as an option.

And also "..."
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Soundgeezer
post Jan 9 2013, 15:52
Post #317





Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 9-January 13
Member No.: 105735



Oh yes, the small print rolleyes.gif

thank you
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Night Rain
post Jan 10 2013, 18:47
Post #318





Group: Members
Posts: 42
Joined: 21-July 03
Member No.: 7909



Just wondering if it would be possible to get a mod or mod2 with passband down to 85? Thanks for considering this.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
j7n
post Feb 19 2013, 01:42
Post #319





Group: Members
Posts: 813
Joined: 26-April 04
Member No.: 13720



Thank you for publishing the old version as an attachment. Much appreciated. It also works under WinXP SP1.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Zippy7
post Mar 7 2013, 23:28
Post #320





Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 10-September 12
Member No.: 103020



@lvqcl: Thanks for suggesting how to do an AB comparison between different settings of the resampler. For other forum readers, lvqcl suggested using the SoX resampler in the configuration of the convert utility within foobar2000 to create WAV files. Then use the official ABX component of foobar2000 to ABX compare the WAV files. It even supports comparing (the same original file converted to) two different sample rates. The ABX component supports pressing the A and B keys on the keyboard to select between the choices, so testing can be performed with the eyes closed. A pause, but no clicks are heard, when switching sample rates. Slick!

I found that minimizing the buffer size in foobar2000 and my ASIO driver's controls minimized the pause duration when switching between A and B with different sample rates.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
juantendo8
post Mar 10 2013, 06:59
Post #321





Group: Members
Posts: 1
Joined: 10-March 13
Member No.: 107142



Hi, I have one quick question. My DAC supports only 44.1k, 48k, and 96k sample rate. I have some 32k sample rate music that I need to upsample in order to play. Which sample rate will give me the best quality?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Sandrine
post Mar 10 2013, 12:37
Post #322





Group: Members
Posts: 319
Joined: 2-July 10
Member No.: 81991



From a mathematical point of view, that would be a samplerate which is an even divider or multiplier of the source samplerate. That would rank it 96,48,44. However, 96 might be overkill, so I'd go with 48. Then again, in the end it's up to your ears.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lvqcl
post Mar 10 2013, 14:21
Post #323





Group: Developer
Posts: 3358
Joined: 2-December 07
Member No.: 49183



QUOTE (Sandrine @ Mar 10 2013, 15:37) *
From a mathematical point of view, that would be a samplerate which is an even divider or multiplier of the source samplerate.

This means simpler calculations, but not necessarily better quality.

QUOTE (juantendo8 @ Mar 10 2013, 09:59) *
Hi, I have one quick question. My DAC supports only 44.1k, 48k, and 96k sample rate. I have some 32k sample rate music that I need to upsample in order to play. Which sample rate will give me the best quality?

Any.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dario
post Apr 21 2013, 12:46
Post #324





Group: Members
Posts: 158
Joined: 20-September 11
Member No.: 93842



Hi lvqcl,

Would it be possible to expose the resampler's "Quality" setting (Normal / Best) via its default settings (found in Advanced -> Playback -> SoX Resampler default settings)? It is the only thing that is not exposed there.

Thank you for all the hard work!

This post has been edited by Dario: Apr 21 2013, 12:46
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Robertina
post May 21 2013, 12:22
Post #325





Group: Members
Posts: 1306
Joined: 4-January 09
Member No.: 65169



Hello, lvqcl,

SoX Resampler v0.8.3 mod and mod2 both don't create messages in foobar2000's console, although I can hear that they are resampling. In the changelog I didn't find a hint that this feature, that I appreciated very much when using v0.5.4.1 mod has been removed.

Do I overlook something?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

15 Pages V  « < 11 12 13 14 15 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd August 2014 - 16:46